-
Cyndy Parr commented on "Epischura baikalensis Sars G.O., 1900":
@Cyndy Parr: Subsequent research by Janet Scott (IUCN) indicates that the original reference Sars 1900 uses the spelling with a "k" so it appears that no further correction is necessary.
-
Cyndy Parr commented on "Epischura baikalensis Sars G.O., 1900":
As reported by Lev Yampolsky, Associate Professor, East Tennessee State University: "I believe I have discovered a typo in the epithet of a species listed by IUCN and EOL: http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/7897/0 and http://eol.org/pages/3008209/overview, respectively. I am positive that the spelling should be Epischura baicalensis, not Epischura baikalensis. Trustworthy sources list this species as Epischura baicalensis Sars 1900. There are 0 occurrences of "Epischura baikalensis" in WoS or Zoological record. I do not have enough nomenclature experience to determine if we are dealing with just a typo or with a misnomer/ synonym situation and whether ICZN should be involved (but copying this to iczn-em@nhm.ac.uk just in case). There is a Wikipedia article on "Epischura baikalensis", which I am working with Wikipedia to replace by the one with correct spelling (it is not possible to edit article titles). I suspect that this might have been the source of the typo propagated to a number of reputable resources including IUCN and EOL."
The Newsfeed for this EOL Taxon Page gathers updates associated with items shown on it, including curator actions and comments from EOL users.
Add a new comment
Newsfeed
Disclaimer
EOL content is automatically assembled from many different content providers. As a result, from time to time you may find pages on EOL that are confusing.
To request an improvement, please leave a comment on the page. Thank you!
